PC: Spanish Peru without Mexico

[Kaiser Tito]

The beginnings of New Spain involved an initial bit of luck before disease allowed to steamroll across the Americas. Francisco Pizarro's conquest of the Incas was one of the biggest examples of dumb luck in colonial history, but would he have had the same success without Cortez's success to build off from? If the Aztecs were to defeat Cortez and either negotiate a more mutually beneficial trade agreement or go to the British for protection, would Pizarro still try to conquer the Incas during their state of civil war, would he be far more cautious knowing the disaster the Cortez expedition was, or would he not be down their in the first place without Mexico as a springboard?

 

[twovultures]

I think Pizarro still tries. He had helped conquer Panama earlier, and had used some of the techniques that he would later use to take control of the Inca Empire such as hostage-taking. He was extremely driven to seek gold, glory and power, and I don't think he would let failure on the part of Cortes discourage him any more than he would have let other well-known failures of OTL such as the initial colonization of mainland Venezuela deter him.

So, an autonomous but initially free Aztec state trading with the Spaniards could plausibly co-exist with a subjugated Peru. IMO the reverse is more likely for a number of reasons, but it *is* plausible.

 

[UnaiB]

@Vinization

 

[Vinization]

Hm, I think it's possible. On one hand Cortés' stunning success was proof that the native empires could be conquered, on the other Pizarro was a smart man, definitely smart enough to exploit the divisions within the Tawantinsuyu for his own benefit.

 

[EMT]

I think the idea that anyone else would try is nuts. Without Mexico's fall setting the example and showing that it's feasible to topple a large native empire, I don't see Pizarro getting authorization to even try. And if he somehow does, it won't be at that peak moment of opportunity that he showed up at OTL